Alex Douglas

English 308J

Matt Vetter

June 2, 2012

Goose Got You on the Down Low.

An Enthographic Study of Acacia International Fraternity

It is a beautiful spring day on the Ohio University Campus. The air warmly wafts the promise of renewal as birds chirp and squirrels scamper on the uneven pavement. A young man with a backpack slung over his shoulder passes by an older student engrossed in conversation with a pretty girl. He pauses for a moment and then calls out “Dodi!“ The older student looks up, smiles, these two fraternity brothers are part of a bigger community. The community of discourse.

The concept of a discourse community has been created and subsequently altered, added upon and ultimately improved by many authors within the field. The complexity of a discourse community was best described by John Swales, who was one of the first writers to shape the concept and brought it to the attention of other prominent writers. Swales argues in his article, The Concept Of Discourse Community, that we need to clarify and offer a set of criteria for discourse communities, narrow enough to eliminate many of the supposed discourse communities (Swales). Swales believes that by having strong characteristics and a rigid definition of discourse communities, we will be able to understand and identify discourse communities with more accuracy. He then proposes six overarching characteristics that are necessary for determining if a discourse community has been formed.

The first characteristic he identifies is that a discourse community has a group of common goals that each member of the community abides by and adheres to. His second is the idea that a community must have a way of communicating between its members. This can be a very broad category as just about any mode of communication that members use can fill this criterion. Not only must the members be able to communicate, but they must also exchange information. This brings us to Swales third characteristic, a discourse community provides feedback and information. His fourth characteristic is that a discourse community possess one or more genres. This criterion refers to the fact that discourse communities are always changing and incorporating elements form other groups. For his fifth characteristic, Swales argues that a discourse community must have developed lexis that are unique and shared between members in a community. This sixth and final characteristic is that the community must keep a balance between new members and old, as not to lose any relevant aspect of their community.

I believe that Swales has provided us with a great platform which other writers can use to further expand on the concept of discourse communities. James Paul Gee is one such author. In “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics,” Gee creates the idea that “Discourses” are more than a literary group. He asserts that a “Discourse is a sort of 'identity kit; which comes complete with the appropriate costume and instructions on how to act, talk and often write, so as to take on a particular role that others will recognize”,(Gee 484). This is an aspect I had yet to think of, and as I look deeper into discourse communities, I have seen that the linguistic aspect is only a fraction of the attributes necessary to belong to a discourse community.

I believe that one person, who even though she didn't specifically write on discourse communities, can still be integrated in to the discussion, is Deborah Brandt. Brandt, who wrote on the aspect of sponsorship in regards to literacy in her article, “Sponsors of Literacy”, focuses on the assistance we receive from older, wiser, more experienced members of a community. I believe that her aspect of sponsorship can be directly tied to Swales' notion of keeping a reasonable ratio between novices and experts (Swales 473). Brandt is arguing that a sponsor teaches us and guides us on a path to higher knowledge and understanding, just as you would follow in someone’s footsteps when you are initiated into a discourse community.

Acacia International Fraternity

Fraternities and Sororities are two organizations that have a large impact on the life of its members and community as a whole. These organizations strive to better its members by instilling them with values and lessons that they can apply to their general lives. When I arrived at Ohio University I joined the Acacia International Fraternity. I visited many Fraternities when first arrived at OU and I was surprised how tight knit each organization was. My fraternity in particular excelled at building bonds between its members. Once a person has decided that they want to join the fraternity, they must get approval from all the members, as we will not permit any element of discord to enter our ranks. The “Pledge” then enters his eight week pledging process in which he will be molded and eventually conform to the norms of the community. The Pledge will be allotting time that could be spent elsewhere, to furthering, not only their social pursuits, but academic as well. Another aspect of fraternity life is having a “Big”. A Big is a person that chooses you to be their apprentice. They will help shape you into a member of the community.

After I learned about the concepts of discourse communities, I soon realized that this community was built on a few simple ideals that mirror and ultimately conform to Swales' Six Characteristics of a Discourse Community. Each fraternity has its own founding set of rules and goals that the members abide by. They include guidelines about how to conduct you in many varying situations including business, formal, social settings in general. Even though members have different focuses, we all have the common objective of bettering ourselves and our community. Acacia also uses many forms of intercommunication to make sure members can discuss important events and issues. In addition to having formal message boards, Acacia utilizes a variety of participatory mechanisms, including but not limited to, text messaging, email, posters, and weekly Chapter meetings. These methods are not just to talk about miscellaneous items. Each message that is exchanged is an opportunity to further the goals of our community. Acacia has also acquired specific lexis that others outside the community may not understand or take the wrong way. Because of the large geographic area its members hail from, each person brings with them words and phrases that can be integrated into the discourse community, though only if the members support the assimilation. The final aspect that binds Acacia as a discourse community is the fact that they are a selective group and will only allow a determined number of new initiates to join each quarter.

Methods

In order to get an in depth look at Greek life I first chose to interview members of a fraternity. Both interviews took place in the fraternity house. I felt that by interviewing them in their fraternity house, it would help them remember and draw back on experiences that they had undergone. I believed that this approach would give me the best results. I decided to ask them questions that would allow me to gain data to determine if Greek life is in fact a Discourse Community. However, I also wanted to determine how authority is delegated and relinquished within the community and ultimately discuss the relationship between experts and novices. In order to accomplish this, I decided to interview two members, one older and one younger, to observe how they viewed each other. For the young fraternity member, I chose to interview a new member who had just gone active in the fraternity to gain insight into how he perceived his role in the hierarchy of the fraternity. I met with Scott Lore a recent initiate into Acacia and his Pledge class president. I believed that due to his high position within his Pledge class and his low position within the rest of the fraternity, he could offer a unique perspective. I met with him the previous week and I asked him questions relating to Swales' six characteristics to determine if Acacia is a discourse community. In addition I also asked questions regarding how he views authority and seniority within the group. I wanted to see if he regarded himself and the new members with the same rights and equality as he did the older members. I also took the time to interview Michael Cerri, who will be hereunto being referred to as “Goose”, a 5^th year active in the fraternity. Goose has been a driving force within Acacia; he has served on our Executive board for 4 years and has held numerous positions of authority, including Risk Manager, Pledge Educator and Rush Chair. His positions as Pledge Educator and Rush Chair put him down in the trenches with our new and incoming members giving him a closer look at the inexperienced members of Acacia. I was intrigued to find if he truly respected and acknowledged the views and opinions of the newer and younger members.

After I had gathered all my data from my interviews, I determined that as one of the most senior members, I should also look to my own experiences and observations in dealing with the struggle of respecting the younger and inexperienced members

Results

In Ann M. Johns' “Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice: Membership, Conflict, and Diversity,” she continues the work of John Swales by examining the role of conflict within discourse communities. She expands on the areas of the cost of affiliation, conflict, and issues of authority. Johns argues that, in an academic discourse community:

[Students] may have to make considerable sacrifices. To become active academic participants, they sometimes must make major trade-offs that: can create personal and social distance between them and their families and communities. Students are asked to modify their language … [and] they often must drop... their affiliations to their home cultures in order to take on the values, language, and genres of their disciplinary culture. (Johns 511)

Whenever you become affiliated with a discourse community there are drawbacks. These can range from the tangible such as financial obligations to the abstract such as changing beliefs. She also brings to light the idea that conflict within a group can be attributed to a need for power and identity.

Going back to Brandt's concept of sponsorship, we can see that she believes that having a sponsor is a very meaningful and substantial part of gaining literacy. She puts a focus on the idea that sponsorship can create a stronger link to learning and access (Brandt 336).

In my interview with Scott I asked him questions regarding Johns' and Brandt's theories. I first asked what kind of sacrifices he had to make in order to become a part of Acacia. Scott attributes many sacrifices he has had to make this year to his initiation and membership in Acacia, though he believes they are worth it. He argues that even though he had to give up some of his free time and pay membership dues, the affiliation with our community is worth any price. I then asked him to elaborate about his role as a leader to his Pledges and as a subordinate to the Actives. He offers the opinion that by being simultaneously a leader and a follower, he has had to deal with conflict on both ends of the spectrum. He talks about times he has had members of his Pledge class resist some of his directives causing friction with his subordinates, and he has also disagreed with the decisions of the Actives, putting him in the middle of the argument. When I asked him how his Big acted as a sponsor in his furtherance to becoming a member. He believes that having someone who is there for you and wants the best for you in your undertakings is essential to the process of becoming a member. He talked about how he stared emulating his Big's lexis, and manner of dress. Scott wished to conform to the standards and norms that the community had established. I noticed that this behavior is similar to what James Paul Gee referred to as and “Identity Kit”. Scott was being integrated into a member of the community by his sponsor.

I asked Goose the same questions but due to his length of tenure in Acacia his answers were different. When he originally joined Acacia, it only possessed 12 members. He discusses on all the sacrifices he had to make in order to turn the Chapter around. According to him, they had to restructure the organization from the ground up to ensure that Acacia would never sink to that level again. He talked about how much time he put into their 5k, which in its first year managed to raise more money for charity than all the other Greek organizations combined. He has seen the Chapter at its worst and at its best. When I brought up the concept of authority and his opinion of the new members his tone changed. He talked about how that the aspect of hard work had been replaced with apathy and complacency. He defends the senior members saying that they know what needs to be done to keep Acacia on the top but; the younger guys have never seen the bad and have never had to put in any work to build the Chapter up. He believes that he has put in enough time and effort and that the responsibility should fall on the younger members. This ideology can be compared to what Johns' says about professional academics, “some professional who understand the rules can also break them with impunity. They can push the boundaries because they know where the discipline has been and where it may be going, and how to use their authority, and expertise (Johns 516).” Goose is breaking the established norms of our community by missing meetings and not attending events causing conflict with the younger people who do not understand his reasoning. As the Pledge Educator, Goose put a strong emphasis on the need for a Big or “sponsor”. He has seen and lived the success stories about wayward Pledges being brought back into the community and their resulting successes, mirroring Brandt's own experiences with Raymond Branch and Dora Lopez, two youths that succeeded in part because of the sponsorship they received (Brandt 337).

Conclusion

The evidence I have gathered from this ethnographic study on the Acacia International Fraternity I have further exposed the complex relationships between junior and senior member in a discourse community. I have also analyzed the effect that having an experienced member act as a sponsor can benefit a newcomer’s integration into a discourse community. I believe that there is a great deal of aspects we could look into with regards to sponsorship in discourse communities.

Works Cited

Brandt, Deborah. “Sponsors of Literacy” Writing about Writing. Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin, 2011. Print.

Cerri, Michael. Personal interview. 28 May. 2012.

Gee, James. "Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics." Writing about Writing. Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin, 2011. Print.

Johns, Ann. "Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice." Writing about Writing. Ed.

Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin, 2011. Print.

Loree, Scott. Personal interview. 28 May. 2012.

Swales, Johns. "The Concept of Discourse Community." Writing about Writing. Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin, 2011. Print.

Appendix A

Interview Questions

6 Characteristics of a Discourse Community

1. Does your Community have any shared goals?
2. What methods do you you use to communicate with other members
3. What is the purpose of this communication?
4. Does you community have any specific genres?
5. Does your community have any unique words or phrases?
6. How do you control the inflow of new members and the outflow of old ones?

Authority and the Role of Sponsorship

1. What sacrifices have you had to make to be a part of Acacia?
2. How do you believe having Big (sponsor) affects new members?
3. How do you view conflict between younger and older members?